Environment and Property Rights

Re: 2009 Senate Bill 169 (Raise compulsory school age to 18 )

FreeSpeaker — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 16:05:01 GMT

I agree with those who contend this bill will do nothing to improve the quality of public education in Michigan. In fact, it well may be harmful to it. The bill should be rejected.

This really is an issue between parents and their minor children. If we want to make a positive change in respect to the dropout situation, we should refrain from evaluating schools -- and ultimately penalizing some of them -- on the basis of their dropout rates. It is a bogus measure of school performance or quality.

Re: 2009 Senate Bill 169 (Raise compulsory school age to 18 )

bestgaffer — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 16:23:19 GMT

This bill does not fix the problem. The problem is - why do kids drop out of school. Let's stop the bandaids & work on solving the problem. A kid who doesn't want to be in school at 16 isn't going to aid the class for the next two years! Since schools are losing money due to decreased enrollment, is this just a case of want to get more federal money for schools? They could use more money, but don't need kids disrupting the school for two additional years. Find out why the kid doesn't want to be there & address that - each one individually.

Re: 2009 Senate Bill 169 (Raise compulsory school age to 18 )

Andrea — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 02:31:35 GMT

I graduated High School at 17 - would I have had to stick around for another year?

Re: 2009 Senate Bill 169 (Raise compulsory school age to 18 )

crazycajun — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 22:23:04 GMT

so, sane.

tell us what a GOOD measure of academic performance in our schools would be?

Re: 2009 Senate Bill 169 (Raise compulsory school age to 18 )

SaneMichigander — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 21:13:30 GMT

Why does this bill appear under "Environment and Property Rights" rather than under "Education," where it properly belongs?

That aside:

This bill is a response to the federal No Child Left Behind Act, which idiotically uses high school graduation and dropout rates to appraise school success and quality.

Dropout rates are a poor measure of school quality or performance. They far more likely reflect family structures and values prevalent in the community. Where strong families that value education overwhelmingly predominate, dropout rates are likely to be low. When the opposite community condition exists, dropout rates are likely to be high.

Michigan kids now can drop out of school at age 16 with parental permission. So the quick fix is to increase the compulsory attendance age to 18, which is the age at which most who graduate will graduate.

Of course, that will fix nothing. It will not upgrade or improve schools, and well may make them worse as we compel attendance by more and more poorly motivated students.

Re: 2009 Senate Bill 169 (Raise compulsory school age to 18 )

crazycajun — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:12:48 GMT

his parents have the maturity, and a lot of them are pulling their kids out at 16. i wonder why that is?

could it be that the quality of education in the public schools SUCKS?

Re: 2009 Senate Bill 169 (Raise compulsory school age to 18 )

gambemar — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 15:33:42 GMT

Let's look at some statistics-Michigan spends more money on the Corrections Dept. than it does on Education; Michigan has a nearly 50% drop out rate; Michigan incarcerates more youths than any other state in the nation and we lead the pack in the use of electronic tethers. Michigan has a well established pipeline that runs from schoolhouse to jailhouse. Michigan also has not been compliant with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act for as long as the legislation has existed and has said,for yet another year, that we probably won't comply for this year either.Yet, we ask for receive millions of dollars from the feds. to educate our children. The longest and probably most expensive administrative hearing in state history was just completed in the Traverse Bay area and it revolved around a district's refusal to meet the needs of a child with a disability. Where is this child now? Not enrolled in public school. We are losing public school students by the scores to private schools and homeschools as well as drop outs because they can't get their needs met in public schools. We are failing to deliver the free and appropriate public educations that they are promised by the Constitution. Do we want to keep our kids in school until graduation? Absolutely yes. However unless and until we invest in their educations, through appropriate programming and funding the appropriate programs, staying in a system that doesn't even try to meet their academic needs is a waste of time and money for all concerned. Forcing students to remain in school until the age of eighteen is foolish if we don't fix the problems of the system that wants to keep them there; it's a simple equation for public schools--more students for a longer period of time =more $ from taxpayers to waste.There is a dark side to public education and until we put the spotlight on the source and not the symptoms, which is the 50% dropping out, then we haven't really addressed the problem now have we? Truly, at this point, they have a better chance of survival by leaving at age sixteen then they do staying until eighteen. Let's put our time, energy, and dollars into education and support services like special education, mental health services, and vocational training. Maybe then we can fix this state for the long haul.

Re: 2009 Senate Bill 169 (Raise compulsory school age to 18 )

jmangan — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:46:18 GMT

This bill is long overdue. A 16 year old child doesn't have the maturity to decide if he or she should stay in school. 18 seems like a more appropriate age for such a major decision.

2009 Senate Bill 169 (Raise compulsory school age to 18 )

admin — Mon, 01 Jan 2001 05:00:00 GMT

Introduced in the Senate on February 3, 2009

Click here to view bill details.